Military Review

Europe did not take into account neither Napoleon’s mistakes nor Stalin’s experience.


In their quest for expansion to the East, its leaders have crossed all verges of reasonable

Bulgaria said it was refusing to join the eurozone. Romania is also in doubt. Poland declares that it will join it only when it solves all its problems ... In general, the process of European integration has clearly slowed down. How long - life will show.

In the behavior of the above-mentioned countries, it is quite possible to see a kind of "betrayal syndrome". When in the west of Europe everything was fine - they crossed there from the Soviet bloc. Today, they are moving from there, honestly stating that they no longer see the benefit of being in the eurozone: they will also need to take part in solving problems there. And they do not like to solve common problems. They love the strong and the rich to solve their problems. And betray when they see that the latter have problems. But in fact, the problem is much broader than the parasitic complexes of European provinces (provinces not only in the geographical, political and economic, but also in the historical and civilizational sense).

In a sense, the whole история Europe is an attempt to integrate it. As an example of this (kind of, of course) integration, you can optionally consider, for example, even the Roman era. When it was time for fragmentation, the idea of ​​such integration on some basis or other was invariably returned, since all the prerequisites for this were evident: the territory is not too large, it is relatively homogeneous in historical and cultural terms compared to other regions of the world, and civilization is relatively uniform.

In many cases, attempts to integrate the European space failed because they crossed a certain reasonable border and invaded areas that were not prepared for such integration or did not need it.

One of the most successful attempts at integration is the Napoleonic era. If Napoleon had stopped his expansion around 1808-10. - it is possible that the union state he created could have been preserved. "Robespierre on a horse," as he was then called, won first of all not weapons: he won because the ideas of the new century, which he carried with him from revolutionary France, were basically attractive and laid down on more or less prepared ground for them. As Engels wrote: "Napoleon broke the ice of feudalism throughout Europe."

To stop in 1808, or a little later, meant to dwell on the borders of what was then Russia. Napoleon’s entry into the war with Russia (incidentally, according to SM Solovyov, deliberately and deliberately provoked by the policies of Alexander I), for a combination of reasons, had no chance of ultimate success if it turned into a large-scale war on Russian territory. The Russian territory in its condition could not be integrated into a single Europe, in particular, because it was different civilization. Yes, it was also Europe, but a “different Europe”, that is, an alternative variant of European civilization.

Having crossed the line, going beyond the territory, at that time relatively ready for integration, Napoleon lost in the matter of justified integration. In a certain sense, he turned the intra-civilizational war for the unification into an inter-civilizational war on civilizational destruction.

The current non-stop expansion of the European civilization zone is already facing the same problem. When France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands started this process in 1951 by creating the European Coal and Steel Community, which by the year 1993 resulted in the creation of the European Community, they began to integrate a territory that had no clear boundaries within itself. and some of these states at one time or another were part of the neighboring. And they started it on the issue on which the union was required purely economically, that is, they formally integrated what was largely integrated in essence and itself. The integration was quite successful, and the result turned out to be attractive for the neighbors: step by step, it included those who were objectively prepared for this, that is, the natural zone of Western European civilization was integrated.

And, naturally, those who wanted to get the benefits of such integration began to appear, having no objective prerequisites for it. The union of relatively equal ones in this way began to turn into a union of unequal ones; unification of those who objectively stood on one and the same type of development — in association with those who, on the one hand, still needed to be pulled to this level, and on the other, who differed in another type of life organization.

If at first it was about the design of the actually existing integration of the historical core of Europe, then it was about including the so-called periphery of Europe in this union. What is France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands? This is practically the territory of the empire of Charlemagne, Western Europe proper as a single civilization. What is Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and the republics in the territory of the dismembered Yugoslavia? At different times, it is either the periphery of the European empires, or a barrier, a buffer zone that separated Western European civilization from real or imaginary threats from the east. These are territories that have passed from hand to hand for centuries, until the twentieth century they actually had no state of their own.

Yes, each of these countries had moments of historic take-off: the Czech Republic at one time extended to the southern seas, including present-day Croatia, Poland was pushing the boundaries east of the Dnieper ... But all this was very long, and in many cases not for long. They could claim the role of periphery-colonies of the Western European empire, if it were created as a colonial empire. But, on the one hand, it was created as a union union of equals - equal in the first place by type and lifestyle, and then - by rights. On the other hand, the Eastern European countries, having escaped from the camp of socialism, claimed and are claiming the role of not “junior partners”, but equal participants of this association. They did not understand that they were junior partners in the Eastern Bloc, not because someone had discredited them, but because they constantly had to help and pull up their development, and pull up so that their standard of living was higher than the standard of living of who pulled them up. But, being “younger” in development, they, having become accustomed to the role of constantly being pulled up, are therefore in the EU, because they believed that there they would also be “pulled up”, and at the same time they would be given equal rights in solving political issues.

At first, old Europe did not think about it: after all, she was accustomed to the younger ones sitting on the development and quietly voting for what the older ones decide, and to the fact that everything in history is divided by real strength, and not by formal rights. She thought, integrating them into her membership, to strengthen her potential in competition with other world centers, in particular, with Russia and the United States, but it turned out that she should at her own expense increase the potential of her new foreign-language “brothers”, solve their problems and service their phobias.

In the face of Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, and so on, Europe saw outposts of Soviet civilization, unacceptably close to its borders, that is, a zone of confrontation. It turned out that, having won the USSR and annexed these territories, it, first of all, instead of gaining power over them, assumed additional obligations for their maintenance and “protection”. Secondly, it created a new zone of confrontation with Russia, which was supposed to overcome the 90's catastrophe and present its capitalist “market” and civilizational rights to these territories. Thirdly, the Europeans received inside the unification a zone of the obvious influence of one of their competitors - the North American one.

Well, France or Germany cannot talk to Poland as an equal! France has always been its patron, its long-range outpost in the confrontation with the German states and the Protestant influence - but it is the patronized outpost, and not an equal ally. There were cases when the French princes became the Polish kings, but they threw this throne, as soon as it came to French interests. Poland has always been interesting for her only a second time, as the periphery. For Germany, Poland was always at all to one degree or another irritant and restless neighbor, among other things, claiming its territory.

The same, by and large, can be said about the perception of Eastern European countries by other states of old Europe. This integration line has created a lot more problems for her than it has allowed to solve, especially since in many cases they have different interests and different psychological visions of the world. In particular, for the old Europe, Russia, with all the anti-Russian complexes taking place, is more likely an economic partner, and in part even an ally in invisible competition with the United States. For many countries of Eastern Europe, Russia, on the one hand, is a potential adversary, on the other hand, it is a tool to foment European complexes in order to raise awareness of its own price and importance as a milestone for Russia’s confrontation. The old Europe in relations with Russia largely needs cooperation, the “new” - opposition, in order to emphasize its role as the “guardians of Europe” and receive appropriate compensation for this.

Plus, the EU faces the problem of claims to participate in the integration of the states that formed on the territory of the USSR, that is, to include in the zone of their concerns and obligations, besides its own periphery of the barrier zone separating the “West” from the “East”, also the periphery of this “ East "- the historical part of another, Russian-European civilization. And now the loose Kiev and Tbilisi usurpers must become the object of attention, anxiety and headache of the old Europe. And since all this will still remain a zone of Russia's historical, civilizational and national interests, to accept them to yourself means to condemn yourself to constant confrontation with it.

The biggest mistake of the leaders of the old Europe was that they, not appreciating the changes in the situation, failed to stop in time - just like Napoleon once did - and crossed the line of justified integration. And instead of creating a belt of demilitarized countries with the status of “eternally neutral and non-bloc” from the countries of Eastern Europe, which at that time would not have caused resistance to Russia, they, in essence, reproduced its quality as an outpost of confrontation, zones of conflicting interests. Thus, having received a headache zone, which, due to the special desire of the “new European” countries to get reinforcements within the EU, has a certain desire for expansion.

In all the measure is important. In 1945, Stalin took into account Napoleon’s experience and stopped on time, did not go to the English Channel, although no one was able to stop him then. But he saved himself from the problems that would have arisen during the reorganization of the Western European countries, in conditions when forces were needed to rebuild his country.

The leaders of Western Europe did not take into account either Napoleon’s mistakes or Stalin’s right decisions. Therefore, they are now tormented by the choice of how to stop, and it is better to push back their unprepared integration movement to the East, or to wait for the moment when the “spring of history” will reject them. Moreover, he will not only throw off the lines to which they will be able to advance, but also question the integrity of the Western European core itself.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mar.tira
    mar.tira 9 October 2012 06: 58
    Europe and America were destroyed by the USSR, and they rejoiced like children. But it wasn’t all so bad to see us if we decided to unite and live in a single space. No one knows if they will succeed in this development model? I I think that it’s unlikely that they will do better than we had. And we would have to exist and develop, have to recreate a real state, not a federation as it is now.
    1. Dinver
      Dinver 9 October 2012 09: 20
      Quote: mar.tira
      Europe and America destroyed the USSR

      The Soviet ruling elite destroyed the CCCP and there is no need to blame the West in this regard, it played an indirect role.
      1. Nick
        Nick 9 October 2012 19: 59
        Quote: Dinver
        The Soviet ruling elite destroyed the CCCP and there is no need to blame the West for this,

        That's right, the West only applauded and encouraged the superintendents of perestroika, not realizing that this, in the future, was digging a hole for itself ...
    2. alexng
      alexng 9 October 2012 10: 49
      Quote: mar.tira
      But will they only succeed in this development model, no one knows?

      Just obliged to succeed.
  2. Vanek
    Vanek 9 October 2012 07: 05
    Theirs has the whole story. Roman fell apart, Ottoman fell apart, Aryan, where is it? The European Union .......... Well, you know in general. And we, Russia, as we stood for more than a thousand years, we are. Well, yes, at 91 they fell apart, but now again. And these as they were ..............
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 9 October 2012 07: 30
      Quote: Vanek
      The European Union .......... Well, you know in general.

      Hi Ivan, in the light of the latest demands for independence in Italy and Spain, the European Union will very soon be covered with a copper basin, and Russia will continue to stand. They are to blame, they have built a "civilized" multicultural world of consumer society - out negative
      1. Vanek
        Vanek 9 October 2012 07: 39
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        the European Union will very soon be covered with a copper basin

        Personally, I feel sorry for them for cuprum, albeit in the form of a basin. There is a cheaper alternative - an enameled basin!
    2. mongoose
      mongoose 9 October 2012 08: 20
      The Roman Empire did not collapse, it died in the fire of Constantinople, stormed by the Turks
      1. Nagaibak
        Nagaibak 9 October 2012 09: 49
        The Turks stormed the capital of the Byzantine Empire. So in the 15th century. And the Roman Empire was buried by barbarians. If my memory serves me right. By the way, the Turks released a film about their Sultan Mehmed, as he then fucked the Greeks.
        1. Simon bolivar
          Simon bolivar 9 October 2012 11: 10
          Mongoose you clearly shouldn't skip class at school; it affects you badly.
          1. Igarr
            Igarr 9 October 2012 11: 20
            Don't run into Mongoose, brothers.
            He knows history better than any of us.
            He said - Roman, which means - Roman.
            And Byzantium is the "nonsense" of the Finn-sheep.
            Now for the article.
            I like it. But, in my opinion, it smacks of idealism.
            As a point of view, it does.
    3. F117
      F117 9 October 2012 12: 11
      Aryan, where is she?
      It became part of the Russian Empire under the name "Siberia", although initially Russia was born as a western outpost of Tartary. And Russia stands because of its "broad" mentality. Indeed, in the entire history of mankind (Eurasia), the territory of our state has always been one of the largest. And this unity was not based on military force (Rome, Charlemagne, Ottomans, France, England, Germany, NATO), but on mutual friendship and respect between people and peoples.
  3. snek
    snek 9 October 2012 07: 13
    Fortunately, all the prerequisites for this were obvious: the territory is not too large, historically and culturally, in comparison with other regions of the world, is relatively homogeneous, and civilizationally relatively unified.

    Facepalm: Europe is an incredible variety of cultures and peoples (there are so many languages).
    In a sense, the whole history of Europe is an attempt at its integration.

    No. Attempts to "integrate", usually expressed in conquest, are only isolated moments.
    1. Nagaibak
      Nagaibak 9 October 2012 09: 57
      snek "Europe is an incredible variety of cultures and peoples (there are so many languages). [" The more of them gathered under one roof, the faster they will fall apart.
  4. Normal
    Normal 9 October 2012 07: 18
    Yes, everyone knows the problem of a suitcase without a handle. And what to do with the buffer countries is not clear. The West will not be able to get away from them, not the same principles. To "feed" them - the toad strangles, it is not enough, and it is not Russia - a generous soul, this West. It would be possible, in my opinion, to try to integrate the buffer countries into Western Europe by actually cutting back the sovereignty of these states, but the big brother in the form of the United States will not allow it. The existing position of these non-US countries is beneficial, since it allows them to have a backup option to influence the situation in Europe. And these countries can always be used against Russia.
    Our task in no case is not to repeat the mistakes of the Russian Empire, the USSR and Western Europe, and not to try to make the buffer states your friends or even just allies. How many wolves do not feed ... Let them live on their own, with their mind and their resources. And we will somehow manage without potential traitors
    1. The centurion
      The centurion 9 October 2012 12: 47
      Quote: Normal
      Our task in no case is not to repeat the mistakes of the Russian Empire, the USSR and Western Europe, and not to try to make the buffer states your friends or even just allies. How many wolves do not feed ... Let them live on their own, with their mind and their resources. And we will somehow manage without potential traitors

      Oh golden words, they would be in the ears of our crazy brotherhood. And I like a balm to the wound.
    2. Fox 070
      Fox 070 9 October 2012 13: 55
      Quote: Normal
      ... And we will somehow manage without potential traitors

      Bulgaria has announced that it is refusing to join the eurozone. Romania is also in doubt. Poland declares that it will join it only when it solves all its problems ...

      What else needs to be said? And if with Poland everything is more or less clear (they have always been enemies for us), then in Bulgaria - there was only drooling. These are professional TRAITORS, people who think with their stomachs. So let them live in an embrace with the European Union and die with it - it's not a pity. And let this be a lesson for tolerants of the "civilized" world - you cannot buy friendship.
  5. erased
    erased 9 October 2012 07: 55
    Nothing artificial lasts forever. The European Union is a hasty decision, albeit an interesting one. However, he will not withstand either internal problems or external pressure. The United States does not need such a competitor in geopolitics and it will not allow disobeying Washington's orders in Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam ...
    And the slave of America in Europe will firmly pursue the policy of the master ... as long as the master is strong and healthy.
  6. serge
    serge 9 October 2012 08: 13
    Dostoevsky (genius!) Already in 1877 wrote that
    “Russia will not, and has never had such haters, envious people, slanderers and even outright enemies like all these Slavic tribes, as soon as Russia liberates them, and Europe agrees to recognize them as liberated!
    Upon their release, they will begin their new life ... precisely with what they will beg for themselves from Europe, England and Germany, for example, a guarantee and protection of their freedom, and even though Russia will be included in the concert of the European powers, but they are in defense of Russia. they will do it.
    They will certainly begin with the fact that inside themselves, if not outright out loud, they will declare to themselves and convince themselves that they do not owe Russia the slightest gratitude, on the contrary, that they barely escaped the lust for power of Russia ... if Europe had not intervened, so Russia would have swallowed them immediately, "meaning the expansion of borders and the foundation of the great All-Slavic empire on the enslavement of the Slavs to the greedy, cunning and barbaric Great Russian tribe."
    Perhaps a whole century, or even more, they will continually tremble for their freedom and fear the lust for power of Russia; they will curry favor with European states, slander Russia, gossip and intrigue against it.
    ... there will be individuals who will understand what Russia meant, and will always mean for them. But these people, especially at the beginning, will appear in such a miserable minority that they will be subjected to ridicule, hatred and even political persecution.
    It will be especially pleasant for the liberated Slavs to express and trumpet the whole world that they are educated tribes capable of the highest European culture, while Russia is a barbaric country, gloomy northern colossus, not even of pure Slavic blood, persecutor and hater of European civilization.
    Russia needs to seriously prepare for the fact that all these liberated Slavs will rush into Europe with rapture, before they lose their identity, they will become infected with European forms, political and social, and thus
    will have to go through a whole and long period of Europeanism before comprehending at least something in its Slavic meaning and in its special Slavic calling in the midst of mankind.
    Between themselves, these zemstvos will always quarrel, forever envy each other and intrigue against each other. Of course, in the moment of some serious disaster, they all will certainly turn to Russia for help. No matter how they hate, gossip and slander Europe, flirting with her and assuring her of love, they will always feel instinctively (of course, in a moment of trouble, and not before) that Europe was a natural enemy of their unity, they will always remain, and that if they exist in the world, then, of course, because there is a huge magnet - Russia, which, irresistibly attracting them all to itself, restrains their integrity and unity .... "
    1. Wertynskiy
      Wertynskiy 9 October 2012 09: 12
      The immortal Dostoevsky is a thousand times right !!! I am ready to subscribe to his every word.
      1. aksakal
        aksakal 9 October 2012 12: 05
        Quote: serge
        Dostoevsky (genius!) Already in 1877 wrote that

        - I am surprised at the perspicacity of many geniuses - you read them, right now!
        Recently, Abai reread the words of edification - nothing has changed!
        The teachers at the school were right - teach the classics, there is a school of life! And we - oh boredom, and what can we learn from decaying pages that lived in prehistoric (well, this is in youthful maximalism -)))) times? Have they ever heard of computers (then there was no word computer -)))? Not? Then what is their genius? Atu and sucks!
        Serge, respect for the quote!
        1. The centurion
          The centurion 9 October 2012 12: 59
          Quote: aksakal
          I am surprised by the insight of many geniuses - you read them, right today!

          The classic riddle from the theory of knowledge (epistemology): How is a smart different from a stupid one?
          Answer: It is common for people to make predictions, for a smart one they come true, for a stupid one they don’t.
          Therefore, smart people have always been called prophets.
        2. arkady149
          arkady149 9 October 2012 21: 21
          But they didn’t hear: "What will be - that was ... nothing is forever under the Moon." History is just repeating itself.
    2. aleks
      aleks 9 October 2012 12: 47
      Only for these thoughts it is necessary for him to erect 3 copper monuments along the perimeter of the western border.
    3. lelikas
      lelikas 9 October 2012 13: 10
      And why does the whole West so appreciate our classics? They have answers to almost all questions - you just need to look for it correctly. Here is the same quote - practically a guide to the collapse of the union. Only we don't read them ourselves.
  7. Strashila
    Strashila 9 October 2012 08: 56
    With feeling, with sense, with arrangement ... but I wanted to add. Old Europe got used to seeing the new participating countries as "new colonies" reviving its Iperian past, it began to conduct its industrial policy in these countries, as with the overseas territories of the past .. destroying the entire industry of these countries, making them completely dependent on the metropolis. We will not consider the former Socialist camp, let us take the example of Greece before joining the European Union, the country was self-sufficient ... shipbuilding, mechanical engineering, defense industry, agriculture ... tourism was far from the main one a source of income. Having entered the Eurozone ... the first thing that Old Europe did, the same as in Russia, bought up enterprises ... and cut them, what kind of competition in the occupied territory can be ... the right of the strong. Why is Russia mentioned in the contest. .. remember the 90s, the desire of our government for world integration ... cut all export-oriented enterprises for the sake of promises of joining the WTO and other integration crap, to Orchest into a fairy tale ... but really further, what you want ... buy in the advanced West, steal technologies of the former USSR. Only by destroying the industry of new vassals, they did not get a sales market ... the beggars have nothing to pay for their Wishlist ... Russia is saved by oil and gas with the remnants of the military-industrial complex ... ...
    1. CRONOS
      CRONOS 9 October 2012 11: 29
      Forgot to add more about precious metals and expensive wood. In general, raw materials are our everything. recourse
    2. Leisure
      Leisure 9 October 2012 13: 02
      For their Wishlist, they offer the poor to take out a loan. Tear off the last panties with socks. 90 years as an example.
  8. apro
    apro 9 October 2012 09: 16
    The collapse of the eurozrna is primarily due to the strong dependence of the founders of Germany and France on the SGA in the collapse of the EU, all these financial crises of bankruptcy of countries included in the EU are primarily interested in the collapse of the EU. And they are too different to live together.
  9. Russlana
    Russlana 9 October 2012 09: 43
    The authors who present the conquerors of the Russian people as enlighteners have already set their teeth on edge. We are provoking everyone to our destruction. And *** like Napoleon and Hitler graciously render us this service. Let the author, if he has at least ONE! Russian ancestor! will try to remember who, when and where died in his family, defending the Motherland and will thrust his vile words about the "great enlighteners" somewhere deeper.
  10. Begemot
    Begemot 9 October 2012 10: 24
    The article is a fat plus! Everything is clear and systematic. Prostitute under-states such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, etc., etc. constantly fell into the millstones of history when real centers of power began to conflict. No one ever considered them as significant, the only thing they can do is to spoil Russia and lick the ass to the west.
    1. aleks
      aleks 9 October 2012 12: 49
      As Churchill said the hyenas of Europe
    2. wax
      wax 9 October 2012 17: 18
      Georgia is especially recognizable!
  11. Allegedly
    Allegedly 9 October 2012 10: 56
    Guys! Europe cannot do anything. Normal Europe was diluted with stupid freeloaders receiving faxes every day from amers. Tribaltica, Romanian Vengroclownada, do something, where is your multipolar world?
  12. NAV-STAR
    NAV-STAR 9 October 2012 11: 45
    I don't remember who said, but the thought is correct:
    "You want to destroy the union - Poland joining it"
    1. The centurion
      The centurion 9 October 2012 13: 10
      Quote: NAV-STAR
      "You want to destroy the union - Poland joining it"

      Why not the whole quote. "... Poland or Ukraine."
      If it is possible to revive the Union in some form, in no case should there be Ukrainians. They will certainly have Mazepa, Kravchuk-cha, etc. figures. Eternal Maidan and Buzoters, they very successfully destroyed the Khazar Kaganate, Kievan Rus, the Golden Horde, the Commonwealth, the Russian Empire, and the Soviet Union. And the new union will also fall apart. Let it be better the European Union. Flag in their hands and drum on the belly.
      1. altman
        altman 9 October 2012 13: 25
        I have to agree, although I have nothing against the Ukrainians, but they will sell their mother to the one who pays the most ... such observations in life ..
        1. NAV-STAR
          NAV-STAR 9 October 2012 13: 38
          Dear Russians, if you are talking about the elite, then clarify and do not add ordinary citizens, some of the characters in your "cream" are in no way inferior to "ours" Yeltsin, Gaidar, Berizovsky, Khodorkovsky .....
          1. Fox 070
            Fox 070 9 October 2012 14: 04
            Quote: NAV-STAR
            are in no way inferior to "ours" Yeltsin, Gaidar, Berizovsky, Khodorkovsky .....

            Ltd! This list is huge and there is no point in listing it in its entirety. good
  13. Oleg1986
    Oleg1986 9 October 2012 13: 04
    They simply have nothing to do there in Europe. They have post-industrialism there, an informational (without form) society. And man is a creative being. He cannot but create. In this regard, everything is very good with us - there are so many undeveloped lands where you need to build normal two-story cities. It remains only to get rid of this need to strive for a 10-million anthill. And what are these "Slavs" (do they at least consider themselves that way for the most part?) Are doing, somehow a secondary question.
  14. vezunchik
    vezunchik 9 October 2012 13: 34
    In the behavior of the above-mentioned countries, one can quite see a kind of “betrayal syndrome”. When everything was good in the west of Europe, they fled there from the Soviet bloc.

    once betrayed, who will believe you ...
  15. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 9 October 2012 14: 35
    Everything is correctly stated in the article. And Dostoevsky's statement in the commentary is right on target! And so many years have passed. Genius is Genius! Extra evidence that history is developing in a spiral, and our ancestors have already passed it. We need to study the history of our classics too - there are answers to many questions of our time!
  16. wax
    wax 9 October 2012 17: 30
    That is why Chubais hates Dostoevsky so much.
  17. wbigfire
    wbigfire 9 October 2012 18: 04
    History needs to be studied. But here's the paradox - she hasn't taught anyone anything yet! Otherwise, there would not have been so many repetitions of it at each new loop.
  18. Stary oper
    Stary oper 9 October 2012 21: 49
    They love the strong and the rich to solve their problems. And they betray when they see that the latter have problems. But in fact, the problem is much wider than the parasitic complexes of Euro-provinces (provinces not only in the geographical, political and economic, but also in the historical and civilizational sense).

    This is where this disdainful attitude towards entire peoples, veiled in pseudoscientific rhetoric, comes from? On what basis? And after that we are surprised at the attitude towards Russia, which is observed in the countries of Eastern Europe.
    Or else ...
    Measure is important in everything. In 1945, Stalin took into account Napoleon's experience and stopped in time, did not go to the English Channel, although no one was able to stop him then.

    I'm curious, the author is aware that the agreements on the division of spheres of influence between the allies were reached at the Yalta Conference, which took place in February 1945. Stalin could not move to the English Channel in any way. And not because it was a man who sacredly fulfills the agreements. He already knew that the United States was finishing the development of the atomic bomb and that the USSR would not have had any chance in a possible confrontation.
    In general, it is time to get rid of imperial ambitions, for it has long been known that true friendship is built only on positions of equality, and vassals are just fellow travelers who will betray at any opportunity.
    As for the European Union and its problems ... These are not problems of integration, these are problems of capitalism, for which integration is only a goal leading to increased profits.
    And more ... Believe me, the last thing Europe will be guided by is "Stalin's experience." :)
  19. dirty trick
    dirty trick 9 October 2012 22: 43
    frankly - Maxim is dead, and to hell with him! what does it matter to us what is there with Europe?
    1. Stary oper
      Stary oper 9 October 2012 23: 22
      dirty trick
      Rumors about the death of Maxim are greatly exaggerated ... :)
  20. sergant89
    sergant89 9 October 2012 23: 49
    GREAT NAME AND PERSON, GOVERNOR, WARRIOR, PARIOT, LEADER, SAVIOR OF RUSSIA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  21. clochak
    clochak 11 October 2012 08: 42
    Yes, it is hard for the Germans and the French from the vipers of the new European members - the Baltic states, Poland and others, but the amers will not allow them to be sent. As they say: took up the tug ...